TSMC expected to announce $100B investment in U.S.

> they only need to make this appear real for 4, maybe 2 years, and can then reevaluate

Taipei needs nukes. There simply isn’t another guarantor of sovereign security anymore.

Now that I’ve calmed down a bit, I agree with your assessment. The optics game is so important, but Taiwan is in an impossible situation.

If I were China, I would give them relative economic independence if they limit advanced process silicon to other countries and let Huawei and others monopolize the advanced nodes. The US at present does not appear to be a dependable partner.

Fair point. I only worry that trump might decide to play them both ways.. extort investments for protection, then reneg the help unilaterally on a whim.

Why would subsequent presidents allow Taiwan to maintain leverage over supply chains crucial to American national security?

Bingo, see Foxconn in Wisconsin.

> What I don't get is, in what universe is any US president going to engage militarily against China across the ocean

The whole premise of TSMC is that losing TSMC would cause such a global economic collapse that defending Taiwan is the only option to prevent this from happening. All high-performance computing is dependent on TSMC right now.

> What I don't get is, in what universe is any US president going to engage militarily against China across the ocean, let alone the current one?

A managed escalation would blockade China, or at least ensure the rest of the free world never trades with China again.

Similarly, a local conflict could ensure chip facilities in Taiwan aren't surrendered intact.

The US doesn't have to win a hot conflict. Just start a cold war.

I still think the US has allies in Europe that would sanction China indefinitely. They'd probably also show up with something, if called.

> across the ocean

It is, but it also isn't, given the US forces on Okinawa, and also just generally in the region. The US military is not a force that exists for homeland defense, it's a force designed purely to project power across the ocean.

> engage militarily

This can mean a lot of things though. A steady flow of matériel and intelligence given to an island that's basically a giant and highly-defended mountain-range is going to go a very long way.

> is any US president

I mean in the last 150 years they've shown a remarkable willingness to intervene, more than once in proxy wars against the Chinese.

It would not go unnoticed and would pretty much guarantee invasion.

> Is it a given that the US would come to Tawian's defence now

In practice, probably yes, officially probably maybe. Giving a security guarantee would allow Taiwan to do provocative things, so hence, why there isn't a formal one.

If it actually came to be today, I guess the US would at-least offer token support. To (a) embargo China, (b) ensure chip facilities Taiwan aren't surrendered intact.

Both of which doesn't require winning a conflict, just making it painful.

My understanding is that there are currently only three important chip makers, including Intel with all of their issues.

The world is largely dependent on TSMC, not only for the latest GPUs but also for embedded chips that we keep putting into everything from cars to toasters.

For me the questions isn't whether the US would help Taiwan because we're dependent on them. I wonder whether we actually have the backbone to step in militarily at all, and whether out military is as combat ready as we like to think they are.

You do, assumming you're a US citizen.

See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Protectionism_in_the_United_St...

or: https://www.hks.harvard.edu/centers/mrcbg/programs/growthpol...

etc.

I don't think there are any multi-trillion dollar deposits of any "minerals" there. If there were, Ukraine wouldn't be so poor. Even pre-war it was the poorest country in Europe per capita. One can argue that it was mostly due to their insane levels of corruption, but then again, if there were any multi-trillion dollar deposits of anything there, Western investors (including Hunter Biden, no doubt) would be all over them, and the country would be much richer than it was.

I think the whole "minerals" thing is a play. Trump gives Zelensky the "deal" he cannot accept even theoretically. Zelensky predictably plays the tough guy by telling him to pound sand. Trump throws Zelensky under the bus and negotiates repayment of loans with his (now scared) successor.

With respect to Taiwan, it is not really possible to "win" in any real sense against China in Taiwan. Anyone who thinks otherwise is a dimwit who can't even do cursory research on industrial capacities of the potential belligerents, not in terms of dollars, but in terms of units/tons/etc. That is where the comparison is very strongly not in our favor. Especially when it comes to shipbuilding.

Best case if things kick off (which I hope to god they do not) - only Taiwan gets destroyed, a-la Ukraine. Worst case - both US and China really go at it directly, full bore, and then we will lose due primarily to our weak industrial base, and far more extended logistics. Moreover, a lot of other countries will totally provide "lethal aid" and intelligence to China, if it needs it, in hopes of taking the hegemon down a few pegs. Nothing personal - just business, such alliances happen in every major war. The extreme case one of the sides feels they're gonna lose and presses the red button, in which case everyone dies in a fire.

All of these options are objectively extremely shitty and incompatible with prosperity, and in the extreme case, with survival. All of them mean millions of body bags for the parties involved, far more body bags than either country has ever seen.

Both Biden and Trump administrations understood this, hence the strong-arming the re-industrialization, especially in higher end fields, which started under Biden. The era where you could just get your stuff made elsewhere for pennies and then charge $$$ for it is coming to an end.

No I don't, and anyway US-aligned semiconductor design and fabrication is still superior to Chinese if TSMC did not exist.

> The thing about US "vassel" states is they don't have to do what the US says. And sometimes won't!

Yes, and then the US will force its way. It's quite funny that you even mentioned nukes. Taiwan did attempt to build nukes and the US destroyed the project.

https://edition.cnn.com/2025/03/01/asia/taiwan-cia-informant...

No to mention that NAFTA was renegotiated under Trumps first term.

Still it might be cheaper to just give him worthless wins with no follow thru.

These were early rumors, but I recall there being some hope that the first chips this factory would produce would be used for something made by Apple also in the United States, like the Mac Pro or something like the HomePod Mini.

What did they think a Foxconn factory is for? High tech what?

ASML make laser sources in San Diego, without them there would be no EUV machines. So it isn't just patents. ASML as we know today wouldn't exist without US R&D and manufacturing.

https://www.asml.com/en/company/about-asml/cymer

You don't risk nuclear war by shooting a few conventional missiles and establishing a blockade.

(A) China would suffer intensely under a blockade.

(B) A few missiles could ensure chip facilities are surrendered intact.

(C) Even a short conflict where a few missiles hits boats invading Taiwan would ensure the rest of the world never trades with China.

Point being: The US doesn't have to win, don't have to fight with everything, just make the invasion hard and isolate China in a new cold war.

It’s not so much the people or the land, but rather what they can build. It’s the whole essence of the article. Not sure how far behind the West would fall if TSMC was controlled by the CCP. 5 years? 10?

The U.S. absolutely defends Taiwan because losing it isn’t an option!

Taiwan currently produces over 85% of the world’s advanced semiconductors. Letting China take Taiwan would hand the CCP control over the global tech supply chain, crippling the U.S. economy and military. That’s a non starter.

No nation with anything to lose will be using nukes..EVER. The game has been understood for 75 years: mutual destruction means no winners. The U.S. has more nukes, better missiles, and full second-strike capability. China knows this, so nukes aren’t on the table.

The U.S. doesn’t need to invade just stop China’s invasion. Amphibious assaults are the hardest military operation, and China has zero real world experience in them or in fighting hot wars at all. We only need to sink their fleet or disrupt shipping to and from their ports. They know the risk, which is why they haven’t tried.

Now 5 years form now if we are much less dependent on them for semi-conductors that is a different story, but the realities of today. For now? Yeah, we throw down.

Also there is the scenario where China co-opts or influences Taiwans elections such that leadership moves back to a pro China stance. Not impossible, that would really put the US in a bind and I am not sure what would happen then but military engagements would seem much less likely.

> China wants to retake Taiwan

Take. They can’t “retake” something they never had.

I believe allowing China to seize Philippine islands without response was actually the appeasement which escalated the situation. (Along with raiding oil fields, etc of their other neighbors.)

They must have a massive influence. I think its gross revenue is something like 10% of the GDP of the whole country.

Does not exclude my point of view. If things go sour they most likely be on the first plane to the US.

Exactly. China has held this position for a long time. Chip plant manufacturing is a recent development. China will eventually catch up with their own manufacturing in a decade or so. They don't care about the immediate short-term - they think in decades.

Even if the desire to absorb Taiwan is ideological, they would certainly also understand the severe practical implications of losing access to their chip production.

Sure, TSMC would want to do that to salvage what they can. I wonder if the Taiwanese government is as keen on that arrangement though; TSMC plants are their biggest bargaining chip, and Trump has upending the entire world order mere weeks into his term.

I think the parent commenter was actually saying that it is unlikely the US was ever going to help Taiwan in the case of a Chinese invasion, regardless of admin.

China was also, in slightly crude terms, an underdeveloped and weak country in 1987. Japan was right next door and an absolutely massive economic powerhouse that eclipsed China. Japan's GDP was nearly 10x China's at the time.

The US had military bases in the Philippines at the time. They did and still have military bases in Japan. Taiwan was right in the pincers of the US, and China, having all the power and development of a mid-tier African country, would have no hope of taking the country without absolutely massive losses and possibly collapsing their government.

Now China is undoubtedly the most powerful country in Asia, in terms of both military strength and economic power. They could blockade Taiwan, fire a few missiles in strategic spots, and fight a war of attrition against the import-dependent island without having to put a single boot on the ground.

Ukraine made protection guarantees with the west in exchange for giving up a key aspect of its defense (nuclear weapons). Russia had collapsed and people assumed they weren't a major threat anymore. Now Ukraine has nothing to wield against Russia and the US is saying "Give us your minerals, and not in exchange for defense. Just give us your resources." Russians are dying by the thousands but their leadership still considers it worth the cost.

Now imagine the Chinese government. They see Taiwan giving the US government their most valuable resources. They see the US government having no interest in helping countries that they've partnered with for decades. They realize they don't have to shove tens of thousands into a meat grinder to get what they want. They realize that the one thing Taiwan could wield to make the world support their cause (chips and the risk of the global tech industry falling into chaos should manufacturing be interrupted) might be moved outside their borders. Not taking advantage of this opportunity would be China ignoring a huge sign that says "It's free real estate."

There is less of a reason to defend Taiwan. Doesn't mean the US won't try. Ultimately, the US wants to use Taiwan, Japan, SK, PH to contain China.

This is to re-secure the advanced chip supply in case a conflict actually breaks out in the pacific.

For China, taking Taiwan isn't really about TSMC. It's an ideology that stems from the century of humiliation. Furthermore, once they take Taiwan, SK, Japan, PH will eventually bow as well.

So what? USA has been a close ally of Canada for over a century, and they are throwing that out the window. They can throw Taiwan out the window too.

Those were wars to kill big scary Communism! Things have changed a bit since then.

No comment on Korea, but Vietnam wasn't exactly popular.

"Taiwan is the United States’ 7th-largest merchandise trading partner ($158.6 billion in total goods trade), 10th-largest export market ($42.3 billion), and 8th-largest source of imports ($116.3 billion), according to 2024 U.S. data (and when the European Union is considered as one trading partner). "

https://crsreports.congress.gov/product/pdf/IF/IF10256

Sounds like we've been a great partner with Taiwan. Also, wanting to trade on "business I.P." would make more sense if you mentioned we're already doing around $158 billion in business with them. Each side's businesses have a lot of mutual dependence where you'd want a higher production of chips that each side could trust. We had a supply shortage with fabs not long ago, too.

Whereas, military tech is a strategic advantage we owe to nobody. They can buy it or not. I'd rather they not be ripped off in the process. Helping us make cutting edge chips here is different than giving people weapons.

For example, I'm American. I'm allowed to have business, but not military, technology. I can probably license and operate a fab. I can't buy fighter jets at all. That's despite how Harrier jets as a solution to traffic congestion could boost my personal productivity.

The Taiwan Strait is around 180 KM long, UK to France is around 30 to 40 KM in comparison. That same strait is also not safe to traverse except for two periods each year, so if they are going to invade we will know beforehand.

China needs to win this quickly, because any sort of kinetic war is going to put freeze the global economy and likely cause a mass recession, while the USA (& India) can blockade China's supply and oil chains from the Middle East beyond their force projection. Russian-Chinese infrastructure in Siberia isn't well developed and could also easily destroyed with strategic weapons from Alaska. Not to mention the sheer logistics of sending and maintaining millions of men across the strait. One missile and those troops sink into the ocean.

Trying to do a blockade on Taiwan premature isn't a good idea either, because it's conversely giving the USA the first move to organize it's forces out of harm's way, and basically turns a signficant chunk of the PLAN into sitting ducks out at the sea. Most Chinese victories are predicated on the China quickly wiping out US assets in Japan, Korea and Guam, if they don't manage to do that and fail to achieve air superiority, their troop carriers are going to sitting ducks for drones and fighters in the air.